Mack among truck makers sued over firetruck sirens

Mack Trucks are among six truck builders sued by four Pittsburgh firefighters… (CHUCK ZOVKO, TMC )

April 12, 2013|By Peter Hall, Of The Morning Call

Mack Trucks has become a target of firefighters around Pennsylvania who claim the bulldog's bark, or rather, its howl, is too loud.

Four Pittsburgh firefighters sued Mack and five other firetruck builders, including Kovatch Mobile Equipment Corp. of Nesquehoning, last week claiming they suffered hearing damage because they were exposed to the trucks' dangerously loud sirens over the course of their careers.

The Pittsburgh firefighters join 15 from Philadelphia who sued last year making similar claims that the firetrucks lacked soundproofing or other measures to protect them from noise produced by the vehicles' sirens.

The truck builders also failed to provide warnings to the users that the sirens were dangerously loud, the firefighters claim.

Repeated exposure to the noise — which reaches nearly 110 decibels, according to court papers — over 20 or 30 years caused permanent hearing loss, the lawsuits allege.

The firefighters allege the truck builders were negligent by producing firetrucks without adequate soundproofing because they should have known the danger of intense siren noise.

They also claim the truck makers violated an implied warranty that the trucks they delivered to fire departments were safe for firefighters to use.

In addition to Mack and Kovatch, the claims are against American LaFrance, which builds firetrucks in Ephrata, Lancaster County; E-One Inc., of Florida; and Pierce Manufacturing and Seagrave Fire Equipment, both of Wisconsin.

A spokeswoman for Mack said she could not comment on the suits.

The company, which had called Allentown its home since 1905, moved its headquarters to Greensboro, N.C., in 2009. It still makes trucks at a plant in Lower Macungie Township and has a customer center in south Allentown.

Joseph Cappelli, who represents the Pittsburgh and Philadelphia firefighters who recently filed claims against Mack and others, did not respond to requests for an interview.

The suits against the firetruck builders are a departure from earlier claims over firefighters' hearing loss, which had focused solely on siren manufacturer Federal Signal.

The Oak Brook, Ill., company also is named as a defendant in the recent firefighters' suits and since 1999 has been sued by about 2,500 firefighters who claim their hearing was damaged by the company's products.

Jeff Hall, a Chicago lawyer who represents Federal Signal, said the company has a winning track record in the firefighters' lawsuits.

Although juries in Chicago and Philadelphia awarded a total of $500,000 in damages in two cases to firefighters who suffered hearing loss, Federal Signal has prevailed in most of the cases that have gone to trial.

Cappelli, of Conshohocken, Montgomery County, settled remaining claims on behalf of more than 1,000 clients for $3.8 million, citing a conclusion "that most firefighter claims are complicated and challenging cases to win," according to a Federal Signal statement from 2011.

Among the hurdles was the fact that Federal Signal had been warning about the danger of hearing loss from its products for 25 years, the statement said. Hall said the company also has independent studies showing firefighters' hearing is on par with that of other men in the same age groups.

But Jordan Margolis, a Chicago lawyer who represented some of the firefighters who sued Federal, said the company tried to blame the truck builders.

"In each trial, they named the vehicle manufacturer and said it's your job to make our product safe," Margolis said.

In the Illinois case that Federal Signal lost, an appeals court said the company could not shift blame for the sirens to the truck builders. Federal Signal has asked the Illinois Supreme Court to review the case.

Mark Rahdert, a professor at Temple University Beasley School of Law, said the lawsuits against the truck makers follow a long-standing doctrine that if a manufacturer uses a defective component in a finished product, the manufacturer is responsible for any injuries that result.

Pennsylvania courts have also adhered to an older standard that holds manufacturers responsible for a defective product even if it took every possible step to ensure that it is safe. In many other states, plaintiffs must prove that it was possible to make the product safer, Rahdert said.

"At the outset, it seems that there is virtue to the lawsuit, particularly if hearing loss has been a known occupational hazard for firefighters," Rahdert said. "Any manufacturer should think about how to minimize the impact of the noise from the siren."